All too often, companies hire outside consultants to suggest ways for the company to operate more efficiently. If companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees, such consultants would be unnecessary.Write a response in which you discu

According to the claim, if companies were to spend more time listening to their own employees, outside consultants would be unnecessary. However, I partially disagree with this statement. While companies should, in fact, listen to their employees, outside consultants are still necessary and should not be eliminated from the people who companies are considering hiring.

The concept that companies should listen to their own employees is a logical one. By doing so, upper management can learn what does and does not work for them through their feedback, as well as be able to learn what can make their job a bit easier to increase productivity. Furthermore, because they know the company so well on how it operates on the inside, they will have a solid idea of what may help to have the company function in the most efficient way possible.

However, this does not mean that listening to them equates to hiring outside consultants as an unnecessary action, because obtaining inside advice is just as important as obtaining outside advice. Employees within the company may have a great deal of understanding on how things look on the inside, but may not have a significant understanding of how things operate on the outside. Hiring an outside third-party can also eliminate any biases that an employee might have about the company. One can view this through an analogy: Someone may be so engrained in their relationship and have their biases about a person, that it may be difficult to see this person from an outsider's point of view. Similarly, an employee can have their subjective thoughts about a company from working there for so long, that it may be substantially challenging for them to see how the company looks from someone else who has never worked there.

Furthermore, while some people may argue that companies are merely wasting their precious dollars in hiring outside consultants when they can merely acquire advice from people within their own company, it is arguable that companies could be saving even more money with hiring outside consultants. These consultants may have a particular plan that could astronomically boost their efficiency if they otherwise were not hired, demonstrating how critical outside advice is. For example, this concept is evident in patients seeking medical help. A few years ago, my uncle was having back problems, but he was not sure what exactly was wrong. Consequently, he went to go see a doctor, who told him that he simply had scoliosis. My uncle was not entirely convinced, however, so he went to see another doctor, who told him that he was suffering from an early case of osteoporosis. If my uncle had not spent more money to garner the advice from another professional, the thought of him having an entirely different chronic disease would have never crossed his mind, and he would have had to spend more money on treatment if it became too late. This can relate back to a failing company; if it were to fall apart before a consultant's premonitions of it doing so, it is possible that there would be more of a financial loss.

In conclusion, having another person's opinion or suggestion is that; an opinion or suggestion. The essence of this is that the opinion or suggestion is optional; the company does not necessarily have to move forward with it or agree with it. Overall, it will be more beneficial than destructive. Outside consultants are there to conjure up fresh, innovative ideas on how the company can run more efficiently, which can limit biases from employees within the company. As a result, companies should look to listen to their employees as well as hire outside consultants to produce the most efficiency.